THE MOST POWERFUL PHRASE IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE

"Do we have a contract?" That could be the best question to ask when dealing with corporate policy enforcers such as cops and other "law" enforcement persons. If the answer is NO, then they are presumingly enforcing the law of the Republic (Public/Common Law), which entitles you to a common law jurisdiction in court. Bring it up when before a judge and on all your appeals.

If there's NO ANSWER, then you could say "I'll take your silence as a NO. So where is the injured party or a verified complaint which the Public Law requires in order for a crime to be commited?". And if the cop seems clueless, you might inform him that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse, and whatever he says can be used against him in a court of law."

You gotta understand that what these municipal corporations, such as the UNITED STATES, STATE OF XYZ, COUNTY OF XYZ or CITY OF XYZ, derive their authority from, is in most cases either a US citizenship (Birth Certificate) or RESIDENCY (ZIP code address).

BUT if they FAIL to state the contract or source of their authority UPON REQUEST, then they're acting OUTSIDE of that contract/authority, EVEN if there is a valid contract between you and them. I.e. they FAILED TO STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED. And NO CLAIM = NO STANDING in court.

Of course they might counter with a question such as are you a US citizen or what's your name and DOB, you answering of which might give them that contractual authority, but I believe that if you insist on them answering your question first, they have no authority until they do so. I.e. they're the ones claiming authority over you, so they're the ones who should answer first what kind of authority they claim over you.

*****************

It basically works like this: If person A claims a contract with person B, and person B does not dispute that, then the contract is PRESUMED as if it is valid. I.e. person B acquiesced to the contract by his silence. BUT if person B disputes the contract, then person A HAS TO REVEAL THE CONTRACT, i.e. mention what contract he's talking about, else he loses his standing to enforce that contract. 

And when it comes to LEOs, vast majority of people DO NOT dispute the contract, which is PRESUMED by the cop. So the cop can proceed based on that presumed contract. BUT if you CHALLENGE/DISPUTE that any such contract exists, then the cop HAS TO REVEAL that contract, else he's acting under color of law, with FULL personal liability. At least that's my overstanding of it.

Remember, cops are NOT LAW enforcement, they're POLICY enforcers, i.e. they enforce COLOR OF LAW, which DOES NOT apply to you unless there's a CONTRACT. So when there's a contract, the color of law has a force of actual law. PLUS, when the policy enforcers REFUSE to identify the CONTRACT which they're enforcing WHEN you ASK about it, then they FAILED to establish their authority to enforce that contract. So by their silence they acquiesced that there is NO contract or by refusing to identify that contract, they acted in BAD FAITH, which nullifies your responsibility to abide by that contract in that case.

*************

Furthermore, ONLY the FIRST State Constitution is PUBLIC LAW of the Republic. Most States have more than one, so the SECOND State Constitution is PRIVATE LAW compared to the first one. I.e. if they want to enforce the second Constitution, they GOTTA HAVE a CONTRACT with you. And like I said, that could be 14th Amendment US citizenship or State RESIDENCY (in a ZIP code). And that's because ONLY the FIRST State Constitution was accepted by Congress as a State of the Union. Whatever political body was formed by the SECOND State Constitution, is NOT a State of the Union. It's a PRIVATE political body which requires a contract to be enforceable on you. Aren't those Elites clever?